Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
FreeBSD vs Windows: OpenGL Performance
toadlife:
--- Quote from: kintaro ---There is an interesting fact that I will point out. The time I will point it out is now. The Linux Kernel has a major proformance option called "premptive kernel". I have no idea exactly what this means however I am well aware of its physical effects on the system. Basically: without it Linux runs as slow as Steve Blammer's metabolism. I have no clue in the entire wet Universe if FreeBSD does whatever this (preemptive kernel) does. Maybe look into that, my dear toadlife.
--- End quote ---
I have no idea if what you describe is supported in FreeBSD.
Here is a quote from the FreeBSD handbook on linux compatibility..
--- Quote ---In a nutshell, the compatibility allows FreeBSD users to run about 90% of all Linux applications without modification. This includes applications such as Star Office, the Linux version of Netscape, Adobe Acrobat, RealPlayer 5 and 7, VMWare, Oracle, WordPerfect, Doom, Quake, and more. It is also reported that in some situations, Linux binaries perform better on FreeBSD than they do under Linux. There are, however, some Linux-specific operating system features that are not supported under FreeBSD. Linux binaries will not work on FreeBSD if they overly use the Linux /proc filesystem (which is different from FreeBSD's /proc filesystem), or i386-specific calls, such as enabling virtual 8086 mode.
--- End quote ---
Unlike withg Quake III, in FreeBSD the framerates in America's Army increased at the resolution went down all the way down to 640x480, and FreeBSD consitently outperformed Windows in almost every map. There were a few exceptions where Windows beat FreeBSD.
I don't have time to post the becnhmarks right now. I'm leaving for the coast for fourth of july tommorow. I might post them in tne next few days though, if I can ssh into my box.
toadlife:
America's Army benchmarks are up.
Quite suprising they were.
http://toadlife.kicks-ass.net/bsdvswindows/#aastart
Kintaro:
You do realise I am not on your local network and therfore that link is very useless?
I hope so. God I hope so.
toadlife:
--- Quote from: kintaro ---You do realise I am not on your local network and therfore that link is very useless?
I hope so. God I hope so.
--- End quote ---
I certainly hope you are not on my local network.
I did a copy/paste job without thinking..
link fixed.
adiment:
Of coarse BSD will have better frames... SP2 has many un-needed services running. This is common sense and you did not need to bench.
try tweaking and modifying xp until it uses the same amount of ram as BSD then bench. It's like comparing a race between 2 cars, but one car has a bunch of shit that weighs it down inside of it.
if you were going to use stock settings, there was no point of benching, FreeBSD would win obviusly(sp).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version